Arnold v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Arnold v. State

350 S.W.3d 65, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1311, 2011 WL 4762053

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 11, 2011

DocketWD 72396

StatusPublished

This text of 350 S.W.3d 65 (Arnold v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arnold v. State, 350 S.W.3d 65, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1311, 2011 WL 4762053 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Harvey Arnold challenges the .trial court’s denial of his motion to reopen Rule 29.15 post-conviction proceedings. He contends his post-conviction counsel abandoned him by filing an amended post-conviction motion advancing only claims that were either already argued on direct appeal or claims that were restated verbatim from his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Harvey Arnold challenges the .trial court’s denial of his motion to reopen Rule 29.15 post-conviction proceedings. He contends his post-conviction counsel abandoned him by filing an amended post-conviction motion advancing only claims that were either already argued on direct appeal or claims that were restated verbatim from his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

350 S.W.3d 65, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1311, 2011 WL 4762053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnold-v-state-moctapp-2011.